Cooperativity, priming, and 3-D surface detection from optic flow

Perception and Psychophysics

Volumn 60, Issue 6, 1998, Pages 981-992

  Atchley, Paul ^a   Andersen, George J ^a   Wuestefeld, A Paige ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; HUMAN; PERCEPTIVE DISCRIMINATION; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; VISION;

HUMANS; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; SIGNAL DETECTION (PSYCHOLOGY); VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 0032132851     PISSN: 00315117     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03211933     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. ANDERSEN, G. J. (1996). Detection of smooth three-dimensional surfaces from optic flow. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 22, 945-957.
2. ANDERSEN, G. J., & ATCHLEY, P. (1995). Age-related difference in the perception of 2D and 3D motion perception. Psychology & Aging, 10, 650-658.
3. ANDERSEN, G. J., & ATCHLEY, P. (1997). Smoothness of the velocity field and three-dimensional surface detection from optic flow. Perception & Psychophysics, 59, 358-369.
4. ANDERSEN, G. J., & WUESTEFELD, A. P. (1993). Detection of three-dimensional surfaces from optic flow: The effects of noise. Perception & Psychophysics, 54, 321-333.
5. BEIDERMAN, I. (1987). Recognition-by-components: A theory of human image interpretation. Psychological Review, 94, 115-147.
6. BIEDERMAN, I., & COOPER, E. E. (1991). Priming contour-deleted images: Evidence for intermediate representations in visual object recognition. Cognitive Psychology, 23, 393-419.
7. BRAUNSTEIN, M. L. (1994). Structure from motion. In E. T. Smith & R. J. Snowden (Eds.), Visual detection of motion (pp. 367-394). New York: Academic Press.
8. BRAUNSTEIN, M. L., & ANDERSEN, G. J. (1981). Velocity gradients and relative depth perception. Perception & Psychophysics, 29, 145-155.
9. BRAUNSTEIN, M. L., & ANDERSEN, G. J. (1984). Shape and depth perception from parallel projections of three-dimensional motion. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 10, 749-760.
10. BRAUNSTEIN, M. L., HOFFMAN, D. D., & POLLICK, F. E. (1990). Discriminating rigid from nonrigid motion: Minimum points and views. Perception & Psychophysics, 47, 205-214.
11. BRAUNSTEIN, M. L., & PAYNE, J. W. (1969). Perspective and form ratio as determinants of relative slant judgments. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 81, 584-590.
12. BRAUNSTEIN, M. L., & TITTLE, J. S. (1988). The observer-relative velocity field as the basis for effective motion parallax. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 15, 582-590.
13. CHANG, J., & JULESZ, B. (1984). Cooperative phenomena in apparent motion perception of random-dot cinematograms. Vision Research, 24, 1781-1788.
14. CHIAPPE, D. L., & MACLEOD, C. M. (1995). Negative priming is not task bound: A consistent pattern across naming and categorization tasks. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2, 364-369.
15. DE BRUYN, B., & ORBAN, G. A. (1990). The importance of velocity gradients in the perception of three-dimensional rigidity. Perception, 19, 21-27.
16. DOMINI, F., CAUDEK, C., & PROFFITT, D. R. (1997). Misperceptions of angular velocities influence the perception of rigidity in the kinetic depth effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 23, 1111-1129.
17. FELDMAN, J. A., & BALLARD, D. H. (1982). Connectionist models and their properties. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 205-254.
18. FENDER, D., & JULESZ, B. (1967). Extension of Panum's fusional area in binocularly stabilized vision. Journal of the Optical Society of America, 37, 819-830.
19. FOX, E. (1995). Negative priming from ignored distractors in visual selection: A review. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2, 145-173.
20. GIBSON, J. J. (1966). The senses considered as perceptual systems. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
21. HELMHOLTZ, H. L. F. VON (1962). Treatise on physiological optics (Vol. 3, J. P. C. Southall, Ed. & Trans.). New York: Dover. (Original work published 1867)
22. JULESZ, B. (1971). Foundations of cyclopean perception. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
23. JULESZ, B. (1983). Commentary on Grossberg, S., The quantized geometry of visual space: The coherent computation of depth, form, and lightness. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 6, 625-692.
24. KOENDERINK, J. J. (1986). Optic flow. Vision Research, 26, 161-180.
25. KOENDERINK, J. J., & VAN DOORN, A. J. (1977). How an ambulant observer can construct a model of the environment from geometric structure of the visual inflow. In G. Hauske & E. Butendent (Eds.), Kibernetic (pp. 235-252). Munich: Oldenborg.
26. LAGAE, L., MAES, H., RAIGUEL, S., XAIO, D. K., & ORBAN, G. A. (1994). Responses of macaque STS to optic flow components: A comparison of areas MT and MST. Journal of Neurophysiology, 71, 1597-1626.
27. LAWSON, R., HUMPHREYS, G. W., & WATSON, D. G. (1994). Object recognition under sequential viewing conditions: Evidence for viewpoint-specific recognition procedures. Perception, 23, 595-614.
28. LONGUET-HIGGINS, H. C., & PRAZDNY, K. (1980). The interpretation of a moving retinal image. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London: Series B, 208, 385-397.
29. MAY, C. P., KANE, M. J., & HASHER, L. (1995). Determinants of negative priming. Psychological Bulletin, 118, 35-54.
30. MCNAMARA, T. P. (1992). Theories of priming: I. Associative distance and lag. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 18, 1173-1190.
31. NAWROT, M., & SEKULER, R. (1990). Assimilation and contrast in motion perception: Explorations in cooperativity. Vision Research, 30, 1439-1451.
32. NORMAN, J. F., & LAPPIN, J. S. (1992). The detection of surface curvatures defined by optical motion. Perception & Psychophysics, 51, 386-396.
33. REINGOLD, E. M., & GOSHEN-GOTTSTEIN, Y. (1996). Separating consciously controlled and automatic influences in memory for new associations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 22, 397-406.
34. ROGERS, B., & GRAHAM, M. (1979). Motion parallax as an independent cue for depth perception. Perception, 8, 125-134.
35. ROGERS, S., & ROGERS, B. J. (1992). Visual and nonvisual information disambiguate surfaces specified by motion parallax. Perception & Psychophysics, 52, 446-452.
36. TENPENNY, P. L. (1995). Abstractionist versus episodic theories of repetition priming and word identification. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2, 339-363.
37. TODD, J. T. (1984). The perception of three-dimensional structure from rigid and nonrigid motion. Perception & Psychophysics, 36, 97-103.
38. TURNER, J., BRAUNSTEIN, M. L., & ANDERSEN, G. J. (1997). Relationship between binocular disparity and motion parallax in surface detection. Perception & Psychophysics, 59, 370-380.
39. VERRI, A., GIROSI, F., & TORRE, V. (1990). Differential techniques for optical flow. Journal of the Optical Society of America A, 7, 912-922.
40. WILLIAMS, D., & PHILLIPS, G. (1987). Cooperative phenomena in the perception of motion direction. Journal of the Optical Society of America A, 4, 878-885.
41. WILLIAMS, D., PHILLIPS, G., & SEKULER, R. (1986). Hysteresis in the perception of motion direction as evidence for neural cooperativity. Nature, 324, 253-254.